Acts 16:1-15

Ironic or Not?

At the city of Lystra Paul met a young man named Timothy. Paul wanted to take Timothy along with them on the missionary journey. There was a slight problem however; Timothy’s father was a Greek. Paul was ministering to many Gentiles but his custom was to go to the Jews first. Timothy’s mother was a Jewess but he was the uncircumcised son of a Greek father. No problem. Paul had Timothy circumcised.

At first glance this seems ironic. Paul had just come from the Council at Jerusalem where he had strongly argued that the Gentile believers should not be forced to be circumcised. In fact, part of the reason for this missionary trip was to inform these believers that they were not being required to be circumcised. Yet, he had Timothy circumcised. What’s going on here?

Clearly Timothy was of one heart with Paul in this and so he willingly underwent this rite. But why? The answer is in Paul’s letters. Specifically we find the answer in Romans 14. Paul is addressing the question of eating meat sacrificed to idols. Some believed it was wrong because they believed that by eating such meat the idol actually was allowed to inhabit you. Paul basically comes down on the side of those who say there is nothing wrong with eating such meat. But he doesn’t stop there. If it is just a matter between me and God then it is simply between me and God. But once others are brought into the equation things change.

In Romans 14:15 Paul says, “If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.” This isn’t the only place where this principle is brought up but the point is simple: I may have the right to do or not do something, but I will not use that right if it is going to hurt someone else.

In this case Timothy being uncircumcised would be a serious stumbling block to the Jews they were trying to win to Christ. Therefore, Timothy was circumcised. How refreshing to see someone actually live what they believe.